Author: NingNing
Does DeSci need meme coins? Do meme coins need DeSci? Can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi?
During this time, lurking in the unconscious abyss of on-chain PVP, I have observed the performance and unfolding of the DeSci narrative in the phenomenal world for a long time:
From the imitation of Pump Science launching longevity drugs $RIF $URO meme coins for on-chain PK, to @0xAA_Science igniting the attention war of Scihub-related memecoins, to OG DeSci projects like Bio Protocol, Vita DAO, ResearchHub blooming again, and finally today when the market thought the DeSci narrative was going to become a thing of the past, Andrew Kang made a call and invented a narrative: 2024 DeSci = 2019 DeFi.
New narratives such as 'open-source scientific papers' and 'reshaping the scientific research paradigm' have made some individuals straddling the scientific and crypto circles visibly excited. To us older generation who have long been immersed in leftist ideologies without realizing it, meme coins with positive externalities seem to be full of justice.
But the question is, do meme coins really need positive externalities like DeSci? I agree with Toly and Cryptos' view that meme coins do not need positive externalities; their first principle is the cyber lottery of the 2020s, selling extreme volatility to young people dreaming of overnight wealth, giving the Gen Z youth a chance to participate in wealth distribution.
Assigning high value and meaning to a lottery ticket is the approach of China's Sports Lottery and Welfare Lottery. Doing so will ultimately attract many naive individuals to pay an intelligence tax, making the director (the house) richer, without any real positive externalities.
But another fact is that meme coin trading is a typical attention-tokenized market, thus obeying the laws of communication. A good narrative (whether it is a positive externality narrative or Cult culture) is a good social media viral meme. From this perspective, DeSci is not bad, it is a kind of honor market collusion.
So, does DeSci need meme coins? To be precise, does DeSci need the wealth effect and market attention brought by meme coins? The answer is yes.
As a niche track, although there are institutions like Coinbase, Binance, Pfizer, as well as endorsements and investments from Brain Armstrong, CZ, and Vitalik, the DeSci projects have always been considered by the market as social currency for elites (a show-off demand), and are not favored or allocated by mainstream funds in the market (who still remembers Celo's ReFi narrative from the previous cycle?).
In the end, can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi? There is a glimmer of hope. Here I quote Popper's philosophy of science: science is not just about truth, but also about power, and it is a kind of religious power of the scientific community, particularly valuing the tradition and academic lineage.
Whether it is research DAOs, Pump Science, or the pirate-style plundering mentioned in Toly's tweets, all are trying to challenge and innovate the existing power structures of the scientific community through new organizational methods, new fundraising donation paradigms, and new collaboration methods.
Though it is a small spark, it can provide warmth and hope on a cold winter night.
But to be honest, DeSci does not have the high financial attributes of DeFi, lacking the two powerful tools of composability (stacking Lego) and cyclical leverage, making it difficult for DeSci to create new assets worth 100 billion like DeFi did back then.